Since 1991, Citizens Against Government Waste’s Congressional Pig Book has documented more than 100,000 pork-barrel projects costing taxpayers $290 billion. The proliferation of pork-barrel earmarks over the past 20 years has corresponded with the debasement of the federal budgetary process and Americans’ growing mistrust of their elected officials. As lobbyist Jack Abramoff and former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-Calif.) have illustrated, lawmakers and lobbyists trade in earmarks as their “currency of corruption,” undermining our democratic system of government.

Congress has enacted several reform measures since 2007 to reduce pork barreling and increase earmark accountability and transparency, yet earmarks continue to figure prominently in one scandal after another on Capitol Hill. In an effort to encourage more members of Congress and candidates for office to kick the earmarking habit, the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW) has created the No Pork Pledge (House version/Senate version).

If these "anti-porkers" have been doing anything constructive since 1991, why are we now having this discussion about "pork"? Tell us of any successes these "petitions" have had. Has the Party of No received any of the petitions? What is Speaker Boehner"s response to these? Will the House of Reps remove these projects from the budget this year?

A more palatable alternative might be to require a sunset clause on all legislation, although some pork comes in the form of a one-shot deal ad might not be affected by a sunset clause. I would just like to see all legislation have to pass future scrutiny or die. It would make it a lot easier to correct bad legislation.

Indeed, good ideas, but not easily workable. Consider that if all legislation had to pass "future scrutiny", Government would surely grind to a halt as the politicans wouldhave repeated chances to bicker, repeat, argue, postpone, delay, again and again over the same bills. Congress has proven to be so gridlocked by those intent on destroying the very government that employs them, as in the present session, that they can't deal even with the most compelling present circumstances. Can you imagine what would be the results if we allowed them to begin again to "debate" the origins of Social Security, Civil Rights, Women's Sufferage, or the "War Powers Act"? And, I don't even want to think on how the "protesters" would occupy the Capital if Congress were again debating if women could vote or black children needed to be educated in Arkansas.

Perhaps we would be better off if the Federal government wasn't deliberating such weighty issues and turning them into political footballs. Until we start electing anti-statists (not anarchists) and hold them accountable, things are not going to change. Unfortunately, I think we have reached a point where more people are happy in their dependency on government than actually want to go out and become a success on their own merits.